Cedric Spahr: Do Credit Suisse Clients Actually Get Charged for His Insight?

A review of my book Trend Following was posted by Cedric Spahr at Credit Suisse:

“The author glosses for over 400 pages about anecdotes and general statements about trend following managers and investment strategies. The book is completely bereft of any original insight about how to design and implement a trend following strategy. If you look for something serious on the topic of managed futures funds, avoid this needless work by any means.”

My first thoughts were to ask Spahr questions: Where did you learn about trend following? How did you learn about what’s in the pages of my book if not from my book? Were you trained in all of this information by Credit Suisse? You talked to all of these traders? You learned the content of my book from another book?

If Spahr wants to write a hatchet review he should put his cards on the table and be honest about his intentions. Why say that? For comparison readers should consider views from those who think quite differently about the content of ‘Trend Following.’ So are all of those other reviewers just morons? Is that what Spahr believes?

The one repeatable pattern I have seen is that whenever a brief negative review appears there is always more to the story. For example, here is Cedric Spahr giving a rambling fundamental view:Spahr sounds like every other empty suit who has ever graced CNBC (and in no way sounds like a trend follower). His kind of dribble talk is why so many people have been sunk over the last few years.

However, don’t get me wrong I want the Spahr criticism. As Nassim Taleb has said correctly:

“When I don’t receive criticism from finance people & empty suits I feel I am doing something wrong.”

At the end of the day Cedric Spahr is just another brick in the wall. Another kid on a conveyor belt headed toward the meat grinder. Roger Waters paints the timeless picture of conformity in Spahr’s world:

8 thoughts on “Cedric Spahr: Do Credit Suisse Clients Actually Get Charged for His Insight?

  1. Micheal, there are 3 kind of audience
    1) Who appreciates your work, enjoy’s the benefit and have a peaceful life. These people will rarely post “for or against” views, Real Trend followers rarely get in news/arguments.
    2) People on the fringe, trying to learn and understand, they will give you half baked comments and opinions.
    3) People whose business (the snake oil one) is getting hurt, they will give you this kind of review, as Cedric Spahr is doing.

    Just be happy on your success and good work, if you get a review from 1 or 3.
    As, for 2 help out.

    Take care.

  2. You should always have 7% of your portfolio in gold for security. This has become a shibboleth. But why 7%? If the other 93% of your portfolio collapses, that 7% isn’t going to help much, even if it, say, doubles in price.

  3. Spahr is a professional blowhard, chronically woozy from having his cranium up his gluteus. These “research” guys, who never trade a damn thing, are untouchable because they never stand for anything. What a genius, telling others what to do with their money and having nothing on the line. Spahr and his ilk are key cogs in the “churn-side”. Cynical Pied Pipers peddling pseudo-scientific gibberish designed to extract maximum commission from brokerage clients. To be criticised by one of these churn-side clowns is a badge of honor indeed.

  4. This guy sounds more stupid than the ususal shill for Wall Street! What original idea(s) has he shown in that interview? If Jim Rogers is down on US fundamentals then where does this guy with a bad haircut get any data that points elsehere? The recent miniuptrend on the DOW is a weak volume uptrend and probably headed for another flashcrash!

Comments are closed.